Andrew SaxtonParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board and for Western Economic Diversification

Thank you, Madam Chair, and I'd be happy to.

With me today is Roger Scott-Douglas, the assistant secretary, priorities and planning, at the Treasury Board Secretariat; Janice Young, the senior advisor of strategic initiatives at the Treasury Board Secretariat; and David Dollar, the director of strategic initiatives at the Treasury Board Secretariat.

I'm pleased to be here on behalf of the President of the Treasury Board and to speak to this committee as you approach the end of this phase of the legislative review of the Lobbying Act.

First, let me thank the committee members for your hard work on this important matter. You have heard input from various parties, and I appreciate your efforts in seeking out the views of stakeholders on this important piece of legislation.

As you know, lobbying public office holders in this country is a legitimate activity and a necessary part of the democratic decision-making process. This is recognized in the legislation itself.

At the same time, Canadians have the right to know who is lobbying their public officials. The provisions of the Lobbying Act, which is largely oriented toward the lobbying industry, assist in ensuring that this activity is carried out ethically and transparently.

In my view, the current legislation functions well, providing Canadians with transparency around lobbying activities.

Indeed, Madam Chair, at the federal level, we have one of the toughest and most sophisticated lobbying regimes in the world.

This government is committed to transparent and accountable public institutions and has taken steps to ensure this since first being elected in 2006.

One of these steps was strengthening the rules and guidelines that regulate lobbying at the federal level to ensure lobbying is conducted ethically and transparently.

On coming to power, our first priority was passing the Federal Accountability Act. The Lobbying Act, which is a key component of the Federal Accountability Act, came into force in July 2008.

The Lobbying Act toughened the rules and ensured Canadians had access to more information about interaction between lobbyists and senior government officials. The changes that came into force in 2008 represent a significant step forward in providing clarity to Canadians about who is lobbying their public officials.

As you know, the legislation was further expanded in September 2010 to include all members of Parliament, senators, and exempt staff in the offices of the leaders of the opposition in the House and in the Senate.

Today at the federal level, the system works well and it is meeting the overarching objectives of the Lobbying Act. However, this legislative review, mandated by the act, provides the opportunity to consider whether in the committee's view the rules and guidelines governing lobbying remain current and easily understood. It also gives stakeholders the opportunity to provide their opinion on this issue.

The current regime seeks to ensure that the interests of all stakeholders—the rights of lobbyists to advocate, the rights of those they represent, and the rights of Canadians to know how their government does business—are respected and balanced against the overarching objectives of the act.

As the committee considers possible recommendations regarding the Lobbying Act, I would ask that you bear in mind these overarching objectives while maintaining the act's focus on regulating the activities of lobbyists rather than those they lobby.

As a government, we are committed to openness and transparency. We support this review and we continue to place a priority on ensuring Canadians have the clarity they rightly seek in regard to lobbying activities.

First of all, thank you for being here. Of course, we would have liked to have the President of the Treasury Board here, but we will still ask you a few questions since you are here with us.

I would first like to explore the role of the RCMP with respect to this legislation. As you know, a number of witnesses have discussed that issue at length. They have told us that the RCMP was not doing its work properly and that there was never any follow-up when the commissioner referred cases to the RCMP.

Do you believe that the RCMP is not doing its work properly? Do you think that we should call for RCMP representatives to appear before the committee, as we have already requested?

Madam Chair, first of all, when it comes to the list of witnesses, that's up to the committee to decide. The committee is the master of its own destiny in that regard.

Regarding contravention of the Lobbying Act and the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct, they are to be taken very seriously. When the Lobbying Act came into force in 2008, we provided the Commissioner of Lobbying, an independent agent of Parliament, with the tools and a mandate to ensure compliance with the act. The Commissioner of Lobbying has tabled a number of reports in Parliament dealing with contraventions of the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct, and I expect the RCMP to continue to take allegations of contravention of this legislation seriously when it comes to contraventions of the act.

I am not sure of the exact number of cases that have been referred, but do you find it reasonable that the RCMP has not done follow-up for each of them? In your opinion, is there a loophole in the law that prevents people from enforcing it properly, from prosecuting cases and imposing fines?

There would seem to be some kind of loophole in the legislation and a problem with the RCMP. Do you believe that this is really the case? Is the fact that there is never any follow-up a problem that the committee should address in the future and try to make changes to correct?

First of all, Madam Chair, I take the work of the RCMP very seriously, and I have a great deal of respect for the work they do and the decisions they make. It's certainly up to them to come up with their own recommendations.

If the committee feels there's a gap in the act, that's up to the committee to make a recommendation as part of their final report on the subject.

I would like to raise another issue. You alluded to it yourself, but I would like to have more specifics on your role and the role of the President of the Treasury Board. Perhaps your colleagues could comment as well. What exactly is your role? Your role as the person responsible for this legislation is not very clear for us. Could you go into more detail about what exactly you do in connection with this act?

Under the act, it is the President of the Treasury Board who is the responsible minister for the act. That said, the unique and important feature is that it is an independent agent of Parliament, the Commissioner of Lobbying, who is responsible for the specific administration and operation of the act. That commissioner reports directly to Parliament on those matters.

Of course, the Lobbying Commissioner does most of the work, because the commissioner is appointed by Parliament for that purpose. However, as parliamentary secretary to the President of the Treasury Board and the person responsible for this legislation, as you have said, what exactly do you do? Do you provide oversight?

No, there's no sense in which the Treasury Board would supervise the work of the commissioner. The role played by the Treasury Board Secretariat would be to support the president in any amendments that were made by the government to the legislation.

Mr. Saxton spoke about changes that were initially made by the government in 2006, when the Lobbying Act itself was introduced, and it came into force in 2008. On the subsequent amendments that took place in 2010, the content of those would have been prepared by officials within the Treasury Board Secretariat and supporting the minister responsible for that legislation who introduced them to the House. But it's not a supervisory role over the commissioner.

That's absolutely correct, it would be the president. Obviously, in so doing, the president would be particularly interested, as the parliamentary secretary has indicated in the recommendations made by the standing committee. Indeed, it would also obviously be very interested in the recommendations made by the Commissioner of Lobbying in the course of the government formulating its position and whatever amendments it chose to bring forward to the House.

As parliamentary secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, do you have any recommendations? Would you like to share any questions with the committee in connection with the Lobbying Act? You may have some recommendations to make. Perhaps you have identified a flaw in the legislation that should be examined by the committee and corrected at some point.